Transcripción

1 Recommendations of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees to the Honorable Miguel Romero, Chair of the Governor s Commission for the Reform of the Retirement System of the Government of Puerto Rico The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) appreciates the opportunity to serve on the Governor s Commission for the Reform of the Retirement Systems of the Government of Puerto Rico. The following recommendations are specific to the Puerto Rico Government Employees Retirement System ( the System, or PRGERS ). We look forward to discussing these recommendations with interested parties as we move forward. Three factors greatly influenced these recommendations: The average monthly benefit for a member of the PRGERS was $1,011 in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009; Employees contributed a total of $340 million to the System in FY 2009, which exceeded the full normal cost of benefits earned in that fiscal year; The government reduced benefits and raised the retirement age in 1990, and in 2000 closed its defined benefit plans to new employees. Benefits and Eligibility The Government of Puerto Rico established the System in The System administers retirement and other plan member benefits, such as personal, cultural and mortgage loans, disability annuities and death benefits. Members include nearly all full-time employees of the Commonwealth, its municipalities and public corporations. Today PRGERS covers more than 160,000 active members who provide a wide range of support for the public. The average annual pay of a PRGERS member was $26,820 in Fiscal Year The System provides modest, but meaningful, pension benefits to over 75,000 retirees and 12,000 beneficiaries. The average monthly basic pension benefit in FY 2009 was $1,011, see page 3, June 30, 2009 Actuarial Valuation Report. Over the past twenty years the Commonwealth has significantly reduced benefits to the point where it does not guarantee any benefits for employees hired since January 1, 2000; those employees are covered by a defined contribution plan known as System

2 Plan members who joined the System prior to April 1, 1990 are covered by a contributory defined benefit pension plan, the Coordinated Plan. These employees contribute percent of the first $550 of their monthly pay and percent of their pay after the first $550. Coordinated Plan participants may generally retire at 55 with 25 years of service or at age 58 with 10 years of service. Those employees who retire with at least 30 years of service receive a merit annuity equal to 75 percent of their final average salary. The eligibility requirements of the Coordinated Plan are in line with other public sector plans. In fact, because many public sector jobs are physically or emotionally demanding and employees who hold those positions are directly responsible for public safety and health many plans provide that employees can retire once the sum of their age and service equals 80. Nevertheless, the Commonwealth enacted legislation in 1990 that reduced benefits and increased the retirement age from 55 to 65 years for newly hired employees. Through a defined benefit plan, an employee s benefit can be calculated using a formula based on a percentage of final average pay and years of service, so employers can efficiently manage the workforce. To illustrate, the initial benefit for a hypothetical 25-year Coordinated Plan participant with a final average salary of $30,000 would be calculated in the following manner: $30,000 x 20 years of service x service credit multiplier of 1.5 percent = $9,000 $30,000 x 5 years of service x service credit multiplier of 2.0 percent = 3,000 Total annual benefit = $12,000 As the name of the plan indicates, this plan is coordinated with Social Security so when a retiree starts to receive Social Security benefits his or her pension benefit is reduced as follows: $165 per month if retired at age 55 with 30 years of service; $110 per month if retired with less than 55 years of age and 30 years of service; all others, between $82 and $100 per month, see page 17, FY 2009 Basic Financial Statements. 2

3 After making significant changes to the defined benefit plan in 1990, the Commonwealth took even more drastic action ten years later when it closed its defined benefit plan to new hires. System 2000 participants bear all of the risk for accumulating assets that will provide sufficient retirement income: how much to contribute, how to allocate those contributions, how to change allocations over time, what to do when they move from one job to another, and how to use accumulated assets when they reach retirement. In short, employees covered solely by 401(k)-type defined contribution plans may invest too little or their investments may provide insufficient returns, thus preventing employees from retiring and causing some employees to remain on the job even when their ability to perform their job duties is declining. Even for those employees who have accrued what they believe may be sufficient savings, there is often little incentive to retire. This can complicate the employer s role, forcing decisions with unpleasant consequences for everyone. According to 3 L.P.R.A , a savings account will be established for each System participant who joins the System on or after January 1, 2000, but according to the Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Statements: Under System 2000, contributions received from participants are pooled and invested by the System, together with the assets corresponding to the defined benefit structure. There are no separate accounts for System 2000 participants. Future benefit payments under the original defined benefit structure and System 2000 will be paid from the same pool of assets, page 20, FY 2009 Financial Statements. In addition to basic pension benefits, the legislature regularly appropriates general funds for System Administered Benefits. These benefits include ad hoc cost-of-living adjustments, medical insurance plan contributions and medication bonuses, and annual Christmas ($600) and Summer ($100) bonuses. Recent improvements include: increased the monthly minimum pension from $300 to $400 in 2007; cost-of-living adjustment of 3 percent in 2007; increased the Christmas bonus from $500 to $600 between 2005 and

4 The System s Financial Condition Contributions to the System are established by statute. Contributions from participating employers are percent of payroll. (Although according to the FY 2009 Financial Statements the Medical Service Administration has not paid the System the employer contributions or the contributions withheld from employees since 2005; in effect borrowing those funds at an annual cost of 7.5 percent of payroll to the System). While some jurisdictions set the employer contribution via law or local ordinance to allow proper budgeting and provide the jurisdiction with the ability to appropriate the funds via tax assessments, setting the employer contribution artificially low does not reduce the cost of the plan. In other jurisdictions these statutory rates are typically amended as required by actuarial analysis; employer contributions are calculated based on benefit levels, age, length of service, salary and the fund s recent investment performance. The Commonwealth is responsible for the legislation that has arbitrarily limited the rate of the employer s pension contribution to percent of payroll, and the Commonwealth has the ability to amend the statute to allow adequate funding of its pension obligations. Employer contributions to PRGERS have seriously lagged the actuarially determined contribution for many years, and those payment shortfalls grow at the assumed interest rate of the plan, which is 7.5 percent. Foregoing required contributions merely increases futures costs. Since its inception in 1951 the System has never received the proper level of contributions. As of June 30, 2009 the System held assets with an actuarial value of $1.9 billion. Based on the value of those assets, at that time PRGERS had a funded ratio of 9.7 percent. This is well below the average for large public sector plans; according to a recent survey by the Center for State and Local Government Excellence the national average for large public sector plans is about 78 percent. The employer s normal cost for benefits earned in FY 2009 was essentially zero; employee contributions totaled $340 million and covered the entire cost of benefits earned that year. The normal cost of the plan is only part of the story; an annual required contribution (ARC) of $1.2 billion is to go toward paying the unfunded accrued actuarial liability. In other words because of accrued, but unfunded, obligations the employer s ARC 4

5 is now about 29 percent of payroll. The FY 2009 Actuarial Valuation breaks down contributions for the basic pension system as follows: Amount Normal Cost (A) Gross Normal Cost $333,517,000 (B) Expected Member Contributions 340,903,000 (C) Expenses 32,250,000 (D) Net Employer Cost 24,864,000 Annual Required Contribution (ARC) (A) Normal Cost 24,864,000 (B) Amortization of Unfunded Liability 1,236,711,000 (C) ARC 1,261,575,000 When healthy, pension plans like PRGERS receive the bulk of their revenues in the form of returns on investments. Current funding of DB plans reduces long-term costs over time through the compounding of contributions and interest earnings. To a large extent, investment returns dictate the level of contributions needed to keep pension plans funded at healthy levels because in a healthy plan those returns will provide about twothirds of plan revenues over the long run. Plan actuaries project that over the long-term, PRGERS will earn an average of 7.5 percent each year on its investments. In some years returns will be below that rate and in others returns will exceed it. Unfortunately, PRGERS has never received the funds necessary to maintain a healthy funding level and at this point capital markets cannot solve the System s funding problems. Recommendations Given the circumstances, AFSCME recommends the following. 1) The accrued but unfunded obligation facing the System and participating employers is a result of a lack of sufficient contributions over several decades. The ongoing reason for the lack of sufficient contributions from employers, however, is that the contribution amount is set by statute at percent of payroll. In essence, employers have no cost for benefits earned in the current year; the $340 million contributed by employees covers the full normal cost of those benefits. The most recent actuarial valuation shows that employers should be contributing about 29 percent of payroll in order to get the System back on track toward full funding: 5

6 The FY Annual Required Contribution (ARC) for the Basic System Benefits only based on GASB 25 and 27 rules would be $1.262 billion. The ARC represents the portion of the cost of PRGERS Basic System Benefits that employers should pay in order for PRGERS to be actuarially funded in accordance with GASB s required minimum parameters, see page 6, June 30, 2009 Actuarial Valuation Report. While making the necessary contributions on a regular basis is crucial in getting the plan on track toward full funding, it is not necessary to make such a dramatic increase in contributions all at once. It may be prudent to ramp up contributions over a few years. At the very least, however, the contributions from the employer should be increased to make sure the System does not experience negative cash flows in the future. 2) Under the proposed early retirement incentive the Commonwealth would continue to pay the employer contribution to the System until the member accepting the early retirement offer would have reached 30 years of service or reaches age 65. Because member contributions are currently being used to pay a significant portion of benefits to current retirees, and under the recently proposed early retirement incentive the system would lose member contributions, the employer should contribute the foregone amounts that would have been contributed by employees who accept the early retirement offer. Bargaining unit employees should have a reasonable opportunity to consult with their collective bargaining/union representatives when considering an offer of early retirement. All employees, whether retiring after meeting normal age and service requirements or under an early retirement incentive, should have a written agreement with the Commonwealth that describes what their guaranteed benefits will be in retirement. 3) The government s current revenue structure cannot support the demands made of the Commonwealth and local government; new revenue is needed to meet the Commonwealth s past obligations while providing resources for current services. Any new revenues should be dedicated to funding the pension plan s existing obligation. The government should not seek to increase contributions from 6

7 employees. Employees are already paying percent of every paycheck; these contributions cover the entire normal cost of benefits being currently earned. 4) The government should not be using contributions made by System 2000 participants to pay current retirement benefits. The individual accounts holding these assets must be administered separately from the defined benefit plan and held in trust for the individual employee, or the beneficiary of the employee. According to the Fiscal Year 2009 Financial Statements, however: Under System 2000, contributions received from participants are pooled and invested by the System, together with the assets corresponding to the defined benefit structure. There are no separate accounts for System 2000 participants. Future benefit payments under the original defined benefit structure and System 2000 will be paid from the same pool of assets, page 20, FY 2009 Financial Statements. If the government has not done so, it should put the administration of these accounts up for bid from qualified vendors and make sure plan participants have a reasonable menu of investment options. Options may include target retirement funds that provide investors with an appropriate balanced fund that matches their time horizon to retirement, or more traditional off-the-shelf products such as index funds which typically offer low fees and expenses. Because individual investors typically pay much higher rates in the form of fees and expenses than large institutional investors, it is important to keep those fees and expenses low and make sure accrued savings are preserved for use in retirement and not eroded by administrative costs. Respectfully submitted by: Brian W. Klopp Labor Economist American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees August 6,

11 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform Section 1 Background The funded positions of the Puerto Rico Government Employees Retirement System (ERS), Puerto Rico Judiciary Retirement System (JRS) and Puerto Rico Teachers Retirement System (TRS) are quite weak as shown by the actuarial valuation results as of June 30, 2009: Actuarial Liability Assets Unfunded Actuarial Liability Funded Ratio Employees Retirement System $18.9 billion $1.9 billion $17.1 billion 9.8% Judiciary Retirement System $324 million $51 million $273 million 15.6% Teachers Retirement System $8.7 billion $2.2 billion $6.6 billion 24.7% Total of 3 Retirement Systems $28.0 billion $4.1 billion $23.9 billion 14.5% Actuarial projections have been done by Aon and by Milliman which show that insolvency is imminent. Below is a chart from an analysis performed in 2009 for ERS prior to the development of the numbers above. $10,000 "Possible Layoffs" $8,000 $6,000 Assets ($ in million) $4,000 $2,000 $- $(2,000) $(4,000) Fiscal Year End Note that the asset levels in these charts are about $3 billion higher than reported in the actuarial valuation and table above. This is because Pension Obligation Bonds are included in the charts, but not included in the actuarial valuation and table. Prepared by 1

12 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform We also learned that because of the immediacy of the anticipated insolvency, many of the tools which typical pension systems might have at their disposal were impotent for ERS. For example, an analysis of freezing future benefit accruals for active employees and requiring delay until age 65 resulted in not much improvement. This is shown in the following graph: $10,000 Possible Layoff, Freeze Benefits and Delay Commencement for Active Participants to Age 65 $8,000 $6,000 Assets ($ in millions) $4,000 $2,000 $ $(2,000) $(4,000) Fiscal Year End So as of 2009, Aon concluded that short term insolvency is exacerbated by: o Projected reduction in government payroll o Illiquid Assets o Employee Loans But even without these complications, insolvency is extremely likely, in less than a ten-year time frame. Consequently, even a harsh reduction in benefits for those still working helps, but does not help enough to avoid insolvency. As a result, we concluded that there must be a reduction in benefits now being paid, or ERS needs cash inflows, or both. Prepared by 2

13 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform COMPLICATIONS The Puerto Rico Retirement Systems are unlike any others in the world. Five characteristics in particular which make the Systems unique and more complicated are: o Special Laws o Commingled System 2000 o Loans o Pension Obligation Bonds o Governance Special Laws Of the roughly $19 billion in actuarial liabilities for ERS, more than $2 billion result from what are known as special laws. These are benefits which are administered by ERS, but are granted by the various government entities, outside of the ERS purview. These include: o Additional Minimum Pension Benefits o Additional Minimum Death Benefits o Ad-hoc cost-of-living adjustments o Additional benefits due to death or disability for reasons specified in Act 127 o Medical insurance plan contributions o Summer bonuses o Medication bonuses o Additional Christmas bonuses These special law benefits are not funded through ERS, but are appropriated each year by the governments. For the year ending June 30, 2010, an appropriation of $150 million is expected. The existence of these special law benefits means that ERS is a hybrid of a partially funded retirement system (like most other U.S. public pension systems) and an unfunded pay-as-you-go retirement system (like Social Security). System 2000 Many pension systems throughout the United States are considering significant reductions in benefits for future employees. Puerto Rico took this step in a bold manner in 1999 when System 2000 was created. Under System 2000, those hired after December 31, 1999 do not receive any employer-provided benefit from ERS. They merely contribute 8.275% of their pay into the ERS funds. The contributions are paid a nominal interest and accumulate until retirement or termination. Of the $19 billion ERS actuarial liability, about $700 million is attributable to System 2000 members. 65,000 of the 160,000 active members are covered under System Note that System 2000 is not a typical defined contribution (DC) plan. Under a typical DC plan, such as a corporate 401(k) plan, the employee contributions are set aside in trust and specifically dedicated for the exclusive benefit of the particular employee. Under System 2000, the assets are Prepared by 3

14 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform comingled and may be actually used to pay benefits for other ERS members. Consequently, if ERS were to become insolvent, as projected, the System 2000 balances would also be insolvent. This means that the amounts contributed by the System 2000 members are not projected to be recovered absent strong action to shore up ERS. Loans Another complication is that employees are permitted to borrow back much of their contributions. This creates a loan balance of more than $1 billion in the case of ERS and $400 million in the case of TRS. These loan assets are illiquid, so cannot easily be used to pay plan benefits. Consequently, the date of de facto insolvency is about two years closer than shown by the graphs above. Any solution would have to consider the widespread practice of employee loans. It is also important to consider that the employee loans are a very sensible option for those employees who fear that they may never get their money back from the retirement systems. This is particularly true for System 2000 members. Pension Obligation Bonds In 2008, ERS issued approximately $3 billion in Pension Obligation Bonds (POBs). The purpose of the POBs was to increase the funds currently available to pay pension benefits. ERS was and still is in a short-term and medium-term cash flow crisis. But as more and more members fall under the System 2000, substantial employer contributions are expected which would help alleviate the unfunded actuarial liability. The System 2000 contributions are growing and will help in the long-term, but not in the short term and medium term. The POBs were intended to bridge that gap. The POB is an obligation of ERS, not an obligation of the Commonwealth. Nearly all other U.S. POBs are issued by the government rather than by the retirement system. ERS has a back-loaded bond payment schedule, which reduces the required payments in the early years, but increases the required payments. So in addition to crafting a short-term solution, the POB repayments must be considered in the medium term and long term. Another key is the anticipated return on investments as a result in POBs. Many governments who issue POBs do so with the hope of earning higher returns on the pension fund investments than the borrowing costs of the POB. This may be more of a challenge with the Puerto Rico POBs because some of the proceeds are invested with the Government Development Bank rather than in equities. This is also a problem because of the low funding level or ERS and thus greater need for liquidity. Governance The Retirement Systems do not appear to be governed in as rigorous a manner as other typical statewide retirement systems. There has been significant change in leadership both at the Board and senior staff levels in the three years that Aon has been providing consulting services to the systems. Although the current leadership is committed to sound retirement system governance and Prepared by 4

15 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform this Special Commission on Retirement Reform is a huge step in the right direction, the history of the Systems suggests that this has not always been the case. The existence of the other four complications mentioned above (loans, comingled System 2000, system-owned POBs and Special Laws) suggests that over the past ten years, the Retirement System Boards might not have been aware that the systems were moving in very unconventional directions. Perhaps the Boards were not well versed in general practice of other pension systems. I encourage the Systems to review and analyze model practices adopted by other statewide retirement systems to ascertain what best fits in Puerto Rico. A good start for this review is the National Association of State Retirement Administrators (NASRA) website and their extensive governance resources. Prepared by 5

16 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform Section 2 Objectives of a Pension Program Employer pension programs typically have three sometimes competing objectives. o Retirement Benefit Adequacy o Competitiveness o Employer Financial Objectives RETIREMENT BENEFIT ADEQUACY In order for an employer to replace its workers who have reached advanced age by workers with more potential who are typically less costly, a retirement program needs to be in place to facilitate these workers transition into retirement. Consequently, a good place to start in analyzing a retirement program is the level of benefits being provided. For twenty years, Aon Consulting and Georgia State University have published data on retirement income needs with the Replacement Ratio Study. This study answers the question, How much income will I need at retirement to maintain my standard of living? The study utilizes the U.S. Department of Labor s Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Expenditure Survey (CES) to take into account changes in age- and work-related expenditures after retirement. The model also considers changes in taxes and savings. We find that required replacement ratios vary by income levels and range from 82% for a person earning $75,000 to 80% for a person earning $25,000. The following table compares the benefits provided by various ERS and TRS programs with the targeted replacement ratio: Prepared by 6

17 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform Hire Age 30 Retire age 65 $50,000 Salary 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 447 Law 1 System 2000 TRS Plan Employer Provided Benefits Social Security at Age 65 Employee Provided Benefits Required Replacement Ratio This chart illustrates that for an individual retiring at age 65 after working 35 years covered under ERS will retire with at least as much income as the 81% necessary based on the Replacement Ratio Study. In the case of TRS members, the benefit is a target of 75%, nearly at the 81% level. The TRS members are not covered by Social Security, but most ERS members receive benefits also from Social Security. For additional information, we have also split the value of the pension system benefits between that provided by the employee contributions and that provided by the employer. We also analyzed this data for individuals retiring with less than a full career and see that benefit levels are still reasonable. These charts illustrate the importance of selecting the appropriate career horizon to analyze. Although very few workers retire at age 65 after 35 years on the job, it may still be the appropriate benchmark. It is a reasonable position for the employer to take that if a worker does not complete their full career with that employer and retire at age 65, then it is the employees responsibility (not the employers) to make up the difference in retirement income. For illustration of these shortfalls, we have included graphs at other age and service dates. Prepared by 7

19 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform Hire Age 30 Retire age 55 $50,000 Salary 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 447 Law 1 System 2000 TRS Plan Employer Paid Benefits Social Security at Age 62 Employee Paid Benefits Required Replacement Ratio Finally, we considered two other salary levels to consider necessary replacement income. For a lower wage earner, we used $25,000 income, where an 80% replacement income is required. For a higher wage earner, we used $75,000 income, where an 82% replacement income is necessary. Note that while the ERS and TRS benefit percentages do not vary by income, the Social Security amounts do vary by income. Prepared by 9

21 Report to Governor s Special Commission on Retirement Reform COMPETITIVENESS While it is important that the level of benefits, perhaps with modest additional employee savings are adequate, it is also important to consider the labor markets and what other employers might be providing with respect to benefits. Most Puerto Rico private sector employers do not offer a defined benefit retirement program anywhere near the level of ERS and TRS. We examined two of the largest Puerto Rico employers for comparison. The University of Puerto Rico Retirement System provides benefits that are comparable to those provided by TRS. University employees also benefit from being generally covered by Social Security. Banco Popular is one of the largest private sector employers in Puerto Rico. They had a modest defined benefit program for their workers, but have discontinued it and now provide little in the way of retirement benefits. The attached chart compares the benefits from each of these programs. Hire Age 30 Retire age 65 $50,000 Salary 140% 120% 100% 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 447 Law 1 System 2000 TRS University Banco Popular Plan Employer Provided Benefits Social Security at Age 65 Employee Provided Benefits Required Replacement Ratio Prepared by 11

Memo To: ERF Members The Employees Retirement Fund has been asked by Deferred Compensation to provide everyone that has signed up to retire with the attached information. Please read the information from

Guide to Health Insurance Part II: How to access your benefits and services. 1. I applied for health insurance, now what? Medi-Cal Applicants If you applied for Medi-Cal it will take up to 45 days to find

New Health Insurance Marketplace Coverage Options and Your Health Coverage Form Approved OMB No. 1210-0149 (expires 11-30-2013) PART A: General Information When key parts of the health care law take effect

July 2011 Graduations & Learning After High School Español/Spanish Last month our schools graduated 1,734 students from high school. These are students who met all the graduation standards from the State

Child Support and W-2 are working together to better serve Wisconsin families. More child support is paid when families understand the rules. Recent child support policy changes are giving more money back

Welcome to lesson 2 of the The Spanish Cat Home learning Spanish course. Bienvenidos a la lección dos. The first part of this lesson consists in this audio lesson, and then we have some grammar for you

ALERT Customers who received a premium tax credit in 2014 and are preparing to renew his/her health coverage for 2016 are required to have filed his/her 2014 taxes in order to continue receiving his/her

The following is an explanation of the procedures for calling a special meeting of the shareholders. Enclosed are copies of documents, which you can use for your meeting. If you have any questions about

GUIDE FOR PARENT TEACHER CONFERENCES A parent-teacher conference is a chance for you and your child s teacher to talk. You can talk about how your child is learning at home and at school. This list will

manual de servicio nissan murano z51 Reference Manual To understand featuring to use and how to totally exploit manual de servicio nissan murano z51 to your great advantage, there are several sources of

TIPS: Understanding Overspray In any pneumatic spray application, overspray is an area of concern that should be addressed early on. Fortunately if it does occur, it s easily remedied through the use of

Dear Parents and Patrons, The purpose of this letter is to inform you that according to the 2013-14 state student assessment results NeSA reading, Gibbon Elementary School is considered a Title 1 School

New Health Insurance Marketplace Coverage Options and Your Health Coverage Form Approved OMB No. PART A: General Information When key parts of the health care law take effect in 2014, there will be a new

& An explanation by Sr. Jdan direct object pronouns We usually use Direct Object Pronouns to substitute f it them in a sentence when the it them follows the verb. Because of gender, him and her could also

Welcome to the Leaders Only Invitation! Q & A A. Ultimate Cycler is here to stay! UC remains completely intact and is complementary to FreeToolBox. As a matter of fact, Ultimate Cycler is getting a facelift!

Nos adaptamos a sus necesidades We adapt ourselves to your needs Welcome to Select Aviation The largest and most successful airline representation group in Spain, SELECT AVIATION (GSA) Airline Representatives

iclef-2002 at Universities of Alicante and Jaen University of Alicante (Spain) ! Introduction! Passage Retrieval Systems! IR-n system! IR-n system at iclef-2002! Conclusions and Future works ! Introduction!

Daly Elementary Family Back to School Questionnaire Dear Parent(s)/Guardian(s), As I stated in the welcome letter you received before the beginning of the school year, I would be sending a questionnaire

A la caza de vocabulario: come se dice en español? Entrevista: el medio ambiente 1. There are a lot of factories 2. The destruction of the ozone layer 3. In our city there is a lot of rubbish 4. Endangered

FORM 16-1 AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OR DISCLOSURE OF HEALTH INFORMATION Completion of this document authorizes the disclosure and use of health information about you. Failure to provide all information requested

Introduction to accounting 1 Welcome to Introduction to accounting I. 2 Let s get started. 3 We want to first begin by defining what accounting is. 4 Accounting is most frequently defined as the language

MajestaCare Healthy Baby Program Helping you have a healthy baby Para que tenga un bebé saludable Your baby s provider After your baby becomes a member of MajestaCare health plan, you will get a letter

This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project to make the world s books discoverable online. It has

Mark Paz August 24, 2015 Dear Parents/Legal Guardian, I would like to start by thanking each and every single one of you for the tremendous help and support we have been receiving. Thank You! Next school

ACTIVITIES 2014 CHILEAN MINING COMMISSION Santiago, June 2014 Overview Introduction Organizations Main Events - year 2014 Some Details Constitution of the Board The current Board is constituted, composed

Learning Masters Fluent: Wind, Water, and Sunlight What I Learned List the three most important things you learned in this theme. Tell why you listed each one. 1. 2. 3. 22 Wind, Water, and Sunlight Learning

Connection from School to Home Kindergarten Social Studies Unit 1 A Member of My Community Here is an easy activity to help your child learn about what it means to be a member of a community. Here is what

Patchogue, New York 11772 Required Documentation for Charity Care The completed signed application listing all family members, must be filled out and returned to the Patient Financial Services Department

RDA in BNE Mar Hernández Agustí Technical Process Department Manager Biblioteca Nacional de España RDA at the National Library of Spain: BNE preparation for new Cataloguing Rules Since 2007 BNE has been